News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Noto Fonts by lillesvin on Friday October 07, 2016 @01:07PM (#12662203)
I hear that argument a lot, but I rarely see a case where someone notes "wrong" usage — like you did — where there's actually any ambiguity. Like when people complain about "literally" being used as an intensifier. I doubt they're confused if the speaker e.g. actually died of embarrassment or if they're just using it as an intensifier.

Language has so much redundancy that a slightly different understanding of a single word in a sentence rarely is of any consequence.

Re:Google Noto Fonts by lisper on Friday October 07, 2016 @01:50PM (#12662532)
Again, everything you say is is true (which, BTW, is why I prefaced my comment with "Just FYI..."). But the sarcasm/ironic-humor confusion is very prevalent even among native speakers, and in a different set of circumstances it could cause confusion or worse because the implied stance of sarcasm is the exact opposite of ironic humor. Also, HN is a public forum, and comments are read not only by their respondees but by lurkers as well, some of whom may not be native speakers and who might therefore appreciate having some of the subtleties of the language pointed out to them.
Re:Google Noto Fonts by WhitneyLand on Friday October 07, 2016 @11:11PM (#12665487)
After reading all the comments here, you still stand behind your original pedantic comment as being appropriate and productive? Fascinating.

If you knew the OP was more likely to feel insulted than to feel helped, that wouldn't have changed your action?

Re:Google Noto Fonts by lisper on Saturday October 08, 2016 @01:51AM (#12665843)
Well, we don't have to speculate. The OP weighed in:

> Just to be clear, I quite liked Lister's [sic] note as well.

So yes.